The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1887-05-03
Ths daiIN 8nlletin,
TUESDAY. MAY 8. 1887.
SUPREME COURT.
SATURDAY, April goth

pNi 'hDai, Apii oOtu'
On the four Judges taking their
seat on the Bench this morning, His
Honor the Chief Justice made few
comments on the conduct of Mr.. j.
A. Magoon in connection with Mr.. j.
7. Dare. Mr.. Magoon's explana-
ton of his conduct was placed on
file.
Mr.. Poepoe was called up and
censured by the Chief Justice for
improper action taken by him in
bankruptcy proceeding, His Honor
stating that there was only one
course for counsel to pursue, and
that was, the honest course.
CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE.
The case of l.. Aholo, Minister of
the Interior, VS.. Robert j. Creigh-
ton, editor of the p. e, Adcertiser
was next called up for hearing.
Ashford & Ashford attorneys for
petitioner; f. NJ. Hatch attorney
for respondent.
The petition sets forth that on the
18th April, w. o. Smith ct. al. in
stituted u suit in the Supreme
Court against the Minister of the
Interior, which suit is still pending.
That on the 10Th April, Robert j.
Creighton, printed in the p. g.
1dcertiser and distributed aud pub
lished throughout this Kingdom,
and more especially throughout the
city Of Honolulu. an article with the
heading, and in words and figures
following. Here follows abstract
of bill in equity as printed.
That petitioner shows and alleges
that the material statements in said
article alleged and set forth are
grossly scandalous Of, and reflect
injuriously upon the petitioner in
bis capacity as public official and
as q citizen, and are calculated and
tend to cast unjust suspicion of
dishonesty and official misfeasance
and malfeasance upon petitioner,
and to prejudice the public with re-
gard to the merit sof said cause, and
to prejudice and impair petitioners
right to just and impartial deci-
sion of such cause SO pending, and to
embarrass, impede and obstruct the
course of Justice therein. Where
fore petitioner prays that said
Robert j. Creighton be cited to APP
pear to show cause why an attach
ment should not issue against him
for contempt of Court for publica-
ton of said article.
In the answer of Mr.. Robert j..
Creighton, on rule to show cause,
after making several formal admis-
sions, lie also admits that on the
18th April, the article set forth in
| plaintiffs motion was printed and
published in the u. 9. Adceriser,
and that il consisted of correct
abstract without any comment of
the allegations contained in said
complaint against said defendant.
He denies that the publication of
said article was intended to preiu-
dice the public with regard to the
interests of said cause or to preju-
dice or impair said defendant,
Aholo's right to just and impartial
decision of said cause, or to en-
'barrass, impede or obstruct the
course of justice therein. lie fur
Their says that the complaint from
which said abstract was taken was
furnished by one of the clerks of the
Supreme Court to reporter of re-
spondent's paper upon the ordinary
application of said reporter for in
formation as TO business transacted
in Court. That said abstract was pub
lished merely as matter of news in
which thepub!ic was interested. That
respondent had been advised and
believed that the records and dongs
of the Supreme Court of the King
dom were public and open to the
inspection of all persons and that he
did not intend any disrespect or
contempt of said Court or of any
rule or order thereof. That said
abstract was published in good faith
and concerned the official acts of a
Government officer of which the pubs
lie had the right to be informed.
Therefore he prays he may be hence
dismissed.
Mr.. Ashford opened the case for
the plaintiff. He called the special
attention of the Court to the head
ing of the article: "a land trans
action ventilated" He considered
1t most injurious to Mr.. Aholo.
This, he considered, was most in
furious comment, and he submitted
that this one line was sufficient to
call upon the defendant to show
cause. He maintained that it was
against the policy of law and equity,
as well as prepossessing the minds
of the public prior to hearing of the
case. 1t is not admissible to print
even n true account of case by the
publication of n petition while iudg.
mcnt is pending. The inevitable
tendency of such publication was
to prejudice the minds of the pub
lie. 1t must follow that people
reading that article, must be pre-.
JUDGED. A person cannot take
refuge behind the fact that he is O
Journalist. Counsel contended that
it mattered not whether true or false,
Al